CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 01, 2026

BenchScope: How Many Independent Signals Does Your Benchmark Provide?

arXiv AI Archived Apr 01, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2603.29357v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI evaluation suites often report many scores without checking whether those scores carry independent information. We introduce Effective Dimensionality (ED), the participation ratio of a centered benchmark-score spectrum, as a fast, population-conditional upper-bound diagnostic of measurement breadth. Applied at per-instance granularity to 22 benchmarks across 8 domains and more than 8,400 model evaluations, ED reveals substantial redundancy: the

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 31 Mar 2026] BenchScope: How Many Independent Signals Does Your Benchmark Provide? Tommy Sha, Stella Zhao AI evaluation suites often report many scores without checking whether those scores carry independent information. We introduce Effective Dimensionality (ED), the participation ratio of a centered benchmark-score spectrum, as a fast, population-conditional upper-bound diagnostic of measurement breadth. Applied at per-instance granularity to 22 benchmarks across 8 domains and more than 8,400 model evaluations, ED reveals substantial redundancy: the six-score Open LLM Leaderboard behaves like roughly two effective measurement axes (ED = 1.7), BBH and MMLU-Pro are near-interchangeable (rho = 0.96, stable across seven subpopulations), and measurement breadth varies more than 20x across current benchmarks. We show that relative ED rankings are stable under matched-dimension controls and that ED can flag redundant suite components, monitor performance-conditional compression, and guide benchmark maintenance. Because binary spectra overestimate absolute latent dimensionality, we interpret ED as a screening statistic rather than a literal factor count and complement it with null, reliability, and saturation analyses. We provide a 22-benchmark reference atlas and a four-step diagnostic workflow that benchmark maintainers can run with a score matrix and a few lines of code. Comments: Equal contribution; correspondence: this http URL@stonybrook.edu, zhao2052@umn.edu; Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2603.29357 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2603.29357v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.29357 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Tianming Sha [view email] [v1] Tue, 31 Mar 2026 07:28:41 UTC (19,721 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-03 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 01, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 01, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗